Allowed

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), v. Sh. Tamanpreet Singh

DRT2 Sept 2023OA/651/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of an outstanding loan of Rs.28.74 lakhs granted under a KCC facility. The court fixed the interest rate at 9.15% p.a. and issued a Recovery Certificate, directing recovery from mortgaged properties or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants directed to pay Rs.28,74,067.26 with interest at 9.15% p.a.; recovery from mortgaged properties or personal assets ordered.

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), versus Sh… — Specific Performance | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.651/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.03.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 02.09.2023

¶6

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), a body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (Act No.5 of 1970) carrying on Banking business and having its Central office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai400021 and one of its Branch Office at Village Baraudi, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Punjab through its Branch Manager Ms. Ruhi Tyagi.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Tamanpreet Singh S/o Sh. Ravinder Singh R/o Village Singhpura Jhingran Kalan, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) 140103

¶10

Sh. Ravinder Singh S/o Sh. Ranjodh Singh R/o Village Dusarna, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) - 140103

¶11

Sh. Jaswinder Singh S/o Sh. Harbans Singh R/o House No.29, Village Bhagowal. Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, Rupnagar-140112

¶12

………Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Ajay Singla, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.28,74,067.26p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Sixty Seven and Twenty Six Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Ruhi Tyagi, Branch Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 17.09.2016, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 and 2 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 12.04.2016, which is Annexure A2 this OA.

¶19

The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 03.05.2016, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 25 Bigha 7-1/5 Biswas situated at Village Singhpura, Hadbast No. 101, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar Mohali vide Declaration U/S 4(1) dated 05.05.2016 along with its Translation, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed:-	Composite agreement, D	.P.	Note,
Undertaking/declaration/c	ertificate, Bank right to ca	ncel	limits,
Consents for disclosure	of information to CIBIL, Gene	ral Fo	rm of
guarantee, undertakin	g/declaration/quarterly certific	ate	from
Guarantor, consent for	disclosure of information to	CIBIL	from
Guarantor all dated 05.05	.2016, which areAnnexures A	4 to	A12to
this OA; offer letter for	mortgage of immoveable pro	perty	dated
28.03.2016, which isAnn	exure A13to this OA; jamaban	di alon	g with
its translation, which isA	nnexure A15to this OA; Revival	letter	along
with promissory note dat	ed 31.07.2018, which isAnnex	ure A	16to
this OA; Acknowledgme	nt of Debt dated 30.07.2019	, wh	ich is
Annexure A17to this	OA; Composite debit balance	confir	mation
dated 01.10.2021, which	isAnnexure A18to this OA;	Legal	Notice
dated 30.09.2021, which	isAnnexure A19to this OA	and A	ccount
statement along with cert	ificate, which isAnnexure A20t	o this	OA.
5. The loan account	became irregular and was classi	fied a	s NPA
and after adjusting debit	and credit entries in loan account	there	was a
debit of Rs.28,74,067.26	p, which is recoverable and the	defe	ndants
were served recall notic	es but they did not repay the	outst	anding

¶22

¶23

amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and were proceeded ex-parte on 22.08.2023.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Ruhi Tyagi, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank) has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A20 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.28,74,067.26p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Sixty Seven and Twenty Six Paisa only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @9.15%p.a along with @2%p.a. penal interest with half yearly rests from 01.02.2022 till the realization.

¶28

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while

¶29

¶30

exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @9.15%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.28,74,067.26p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Sixty Seven and Twenty Six Paisa only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @9.15%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶31

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 12.09.2023.

¶33

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶34

Dated: 02.09.2023

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

¶36

Order dictated, signed and pronounced by me in the open Tribunal.

¶37

Dated: 02.09.2023

¶38

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), v. Sh. Tamanpreet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), v. Sh. Tamanpreet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India, versus Kunwar Enterprises

Icici bank Limited versus Sh. Gulab Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sardool Singh

Canara Bank, versus Smt. Karnail Kaur

Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank), versus Amrinder Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Nirmal Singh and Another